Sigmund Kemery J, Bement Marie K Hoeger, Huddleston Wendy E, Ebersole Kyle T, Earl-Boehm Jennifer E
School of Rehabilitation Sciences and Technology, College of Health Professions and Sciences, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee.
Department of Health and Human Performance, Exercise Physiology Program, Concordia University Wisconsin.
J Athl Train. 2025 Feb 1;60(2):125-133. doi: 10.4085/1062-6050-0124.24.
Patellofemoral pain (PFP) has poor long-term recovery outcomes. Central sensitization describes central nervous system changes altering pain modulation, which can complicate recovery (poorer prognosis and worse function). Signs of central sensitization include amplified pain facilitation, pain hypersensitivity, and impaired pain inhibition, which can be measured with temporal summation of pain (TSP), pressure pain thresholds (PPTs), and conditioned pain modulation (CPM), respectively. Sex differences exist for these test responses, but female-only PFP investigations of sensitization are uncommon. Understanding pain modulation in females with PFP could improve treatment protocols.
To determine whether females with PFP exhibit signs of central sensitization (greater TSP, lower PPTs, and reduced CPM) compared with pain-free females.
Cross-sectional study.
Laboratory.
Thirty-three females ([20 PFP, 13 pain free]; age: PFP 29.2 ± 7 years, pain free 28 ± 7 years; height: PFP 166.7 ± 5.9 cm, pain free 166 ± 9.5 cm; mass: PFP 66.7 ± 9.6 kg, pain free 69.3 ± 7.5 kg).
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Temporal summation of pain was assessed with 10 punctate stimuli applied to the knee and calculated by the difference in pain intensity between beginning and end responses. Pressure pain thresholds were tested at 4 sites (3 for local hypersensitivity [knee] and 1 for widespread hypersensitivity [hand]). Conditioned pain modulation was conducted by comparing PPTs during 2 conditions (baseline and ice immersion). Conditioned pain modulation response was defined as the percent difference between conditions. Between-groups differences in TSP response were analyzed with a Welch test. Separate Welch tests analyzed group comparisons of PPTs and CPM responses at 4 sites.
Females with PFP exhibited greater TSP response (P = .019) and lower CPM response at patella center (P = .010) and hand sites (P = .007) than pain-free females. Pressure pain thresholds group differences were not observed at any site (P > .0125).
Females with PFP modulate pain differently than pain-free females. Clinicians should recognize signs of central sensitization and their potential effect on treatment options.
髌股疼痛(PFP)的长期恢复效果不佳。中枢敏化描述了中枢神经系统的变化,这种变化会改变疼痛调节,从而使恢复过程复杂化(预后较差且功能更差)。中枢敏化的迹象包括疼痛易化增强、疼痛超敏和疼痛抑制受损,可分别通过疼痛时间总和(TSP)、压力疼痛阈值(PPT)和条件性疼痛调节(CPM)来测量。这些测试反应存在性别差异,但仅针对女性的PFP敏化研究并不常见。了解PFP女性的疼痛调节情况可能会改善治疗方案。
确定与无疼痛女性相比,PFP女性是否表现出中枢敏化的迹象(更大的TSP、更低的PPT和更低的CPM)。
横断面研究。
实验室。
33名女性([20名PFP患者,13名无疼痛者];年龄:PFP患者29.2±7岁,无疼痛者28±7岁;身高:PFP患者166.7±5.9厘米,无疼痛者166±9.5厘米;体重:PFP患者66.7±9.6千克,无疼痛者69.3±7.5千克)。
通过对膝盖施加10次点状刺激来评估疼痛时间总和,并通过开始和结束反应之间的疼痛强度差异来计算。在4个部位测试压力疼痛阈值(3个用于局部超敏[膝盖],1个用于广泛超敏[手部])。通过比较两种条件(基线和冰敷)下的PPT来进行条件性疼痛调节。条件性疼痛调节反应定义为两种条件之间的百分比差异。使用韦尔奇检验分析TSP反应的组间差异。分别用韦尔奇检验分析4个部位PPT和CPM反应的组间比较。
与无疼痛女性相比,PFP女性表现出更大的TSP反应(P = 0.019),在髌骨中心(P = 0.010)和手部部位(P = 0.007)的CPM反应更低。在任何部位均未观察到压力疼痛阈值的组间差异(P > 0.0125)。
PFP女性与无疼痛女性的疼痛调节方式不同。临床医生应认识到中枢敏化的迹象及其对治疗选择的潜在影响。